click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20120928
20121006
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)
ronald reagan did in his debate against jimmy carter. people don't remember all the facts and figures, the recitation of the facts and figures, they remember a significant line or a significant phrase that brings them back to reality. >> senator john mccain is the only man who has debated both of these individuals. he weighed in on the expectations this morning. take a listen. >> serve and provide us -- >> it's not just that they go bankrupt, he doesn't understand -- >> comments that grabbed everybody's attention. because frankly, the candidates are too well prepared. they're well scripted. >> what you did not hear the beginning there, is the senator said i think you're going to see more viewers, than any debate in history. and then he also said he can't remember the last time that any of these things affected the outcome of a presidential race. save 1960 and 2000, have the debates ever really impacted the outcome of a race, chris kofinis? >> it's funny, i hear the debate about debates not necessarily mattering. and i actually disagree with that i think the 1980, the reagan/carter deb
in the past three decades. ronald reagan made a deal with tip o'neil. it was for tax increases and spending control. >> hurt republicans when they ran for office, didn't it? >> they got the tax increases. they didn't get spending cuts. he got the tax increases ch he didn't get the spending cuts. >> do you think it was a governing mistake. if he gets elected president, is he going to regret that? >> i think the crisis we face financially is so severe that all the discussion of finances last night, you can fergs. we don't have the money to expand the military. we don't have the money you have to overhaul sos to keep it sound. >> he wants to spend more money in the military. do you think that's a mistake? >> the money isn't there. >> david, this is where the obama campaign wants to go. it's saying, yes, we lost on style. but romney made himself -- i mean, senator, it's a complicated argument he's making on these issues. >> absolutely. and it's going to make sense after the the election. we're facing a fiscal cliff. all the consumers will come into play. and i obama campaign is going to say, lo
. we cover elections, not economics generally, but ronald reagan was re-elected with a 7.2% because he said it was the morning in america. optimism was what he sold. he was able to say 7.2% is great news, great news. he got re-elected with 49 states. he lost minnesota and the district of columbia with 7.2%. what should obama get with 7.8%? it seems like it's within the range there and everybody is pooh-poohing it and, oh, geez. i know why jack welch is scared, that number is too damn close to reagan's number. >> i think how this works with the president's narrative is that we're moving in the right direction, don't change -- you know, don't change horses, don't go back to a playbook that demonstrably didn't work, the george bush supply side stuff that he can legitimately tie to mitt romney. he had a narrative that said the economy is moving in the right direction, and i think this job report actually strengthens that narrative. and much more than levels of variables like the level of the employment rate, it's momentum that i think forms voters' views on the economy. >> i think it was i
, there will be an increase. the government is wasting enough money already. i believe in the ronald reagan approach -- if i can finish my answer, you should not feed the beast. let's put the beast on a diet and spend a little less money. >> did the department of homeland security, does that count as feeding the beast or not? >> i have no contract with the department of homeland security. one more try in an attack, doesn't work. never done a contract with the department of homeland security. don't have one planned. don't get any money from the government. >> sure. >> you can try all those attacks that you want. i do private business with private individuals. get no money from the government. want to try another one? >> mayor giuliani, if you're inviting it. the difference is that under mitt romney, rich people will pay a lot less in taxes than what they would pay under president obama, because president obama would let the bush tax cuts expire for higher earning individuals only. so rich people pay less under romney and more under obama. that is the ultimate answer, right? >> the ultimate answer is if eithe
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8 (some duplicates have been removed)